Groundbreaking Research

Developing the Next
Generation of Professionals

When we asked lawyers around the
world what motivates them,
professional growth was very high
on the list no matter their gender, no matter their
years at the bar and no matter where in the world
they live and work. Lawyers thrive on learning –
indeed they crave it.

Unlike other aspects of our study (motivation, reward, aspiration) there is virtually no cultural difference in the professional development needs of young professionals. Over 95% of both associates and partners around the world agreed that continuous professional growth – by that they mean consistently challenging work – was one of the most critical aspects of professional happiness.

We have spoken with many associates who tell us that the top three reasons they give us for making a lateral move are:

lack of challenging work,

lack of professional growth, lack of learning,
lack of career opportunity and

lack of meaningful working relationships.

by Karen MacKay, MBA, CHIC
President

Young professionals develop when three critical components work in harmony. First, formal training: this of course begins in law school but continues through CLE programs and in house training. Second, experiential learning: actually doing work that is appropriate for their level and that is challenging. Third, observation: by observing senior practitioners in action and through mentoring relationships.

Survey Statistics

No. of Firms in the Study:

No. of Respondents:

Geographic Regions:

Demographics
71% of Associates:
74% of Partners:

Gender
Associates:
Partners:

63

800

70% North America
11% South America
13% UK/EU
6% Asia Pacific

25 to 35 yrs old - Generation X
41 to 55 yrs old - Baby
Boomers

55% Male / 45% Female
77% Male / 23% Female

Challenging Work

The challenge for firm leaders is two fold. First,
knowing each of your lawyers is critical - really
knowing them. Where they are in their skill
development and what they need next in terms of
stretch engagements. At the right level, at the
right pace and with the right encouragement they
have a shot at reaching their potential. Second,
and more important, is managing the firm’s risk
while giving associates an appropriate challenge.
When asked if his work was continually
challenging, one associate said “yes, but not
necessarily in a good way. I am often placed in
uncomfortable situations…”. He was not alone
in expressing that he is sometimes responsible
for matters for which he does not feel
appropriately trained and that “controlling”
partners do not encourage associates to seek
assistance from others in the firm. Associates in
such situations feel helpless, fearful and stressed.

There are some partners who “keep clients close
and associates at a distance”. Those partners,
often resulting from their own lack of selfconfidence,
do not delegate challenging work
and stifle development of associates around
them. Associates grow out of these jobs and
leave.

Allocation of Work

We asked if work was allocated equitable and
wisdom on the subject came from both
associates and partners. “What does equitably
mean?” said one associate. “I don’t have a
“right” to receive work; I have the opportunity to
develop relationships with partners in which they
entrust their work and their clients to me.”

The
partner perspective: “we have a free-market
system, so the good, aggressive associates are
relied upon heavily.” Basically, good, talented
people attract the trust of the partners with whom
they work. Practicing law can be difficult and
people like to work with people they like and
trust. It’s that simple.

It is clear that “the best are also the busiest”.
Those associates who do not give partners a
sense of confidence can quickly get lost in the
development process. They don’t get the work;
therefore they don’t have the hours. If they don’t
get the work, they don’t learn and they fall
behind their peers.

Firms that are gaining ground here are doing it at
the practice group level. Practice group leaders
who are committed to developing junior talent
have some influence. A problem arises when
there is an experience gap in a group and leaders
must manage these situations.

For example, a
small group has three associates; a sixth year, a
second year and a first year associate supporting
a very busy rainmaker partner. The sixth year
associate leaves. The second year associate has
been with the firm since graduation and was a
summer associate (or in Canada as an articling
student for a year, or in the UK as a trainee for
two years). The partner has known this junior
for some time and that second year junior
becomes heir to his former colleague’s files
when she leaves. Two things can happen. First,
the second year can rise to the occasion but not
without some level of personal and professional
stress. Second, the second year can become
completely overwhelmed, begin showing a lack
of confidence, lose the confidence of the partner
and as a result becomes a casualty, due to poor
management of the situation.

In house Training – a Balancing Act

When we asked associates and partners in 63
firms around the world if there were formal
training programs in their firms; 82% of partners
said yes while only 69% of associates agreed.
Needless to say this response is somewhat
mystifying. Perhaps for some partners this is a
case of having “talked” about a program rather
than actually doing the program.
Where firms do provide some sort of formal in
house training, the investment is primarily at the
junior levels. While firms have an obligation to
get juniors up and running my challenge to you
is to rethink this investment. Attrition in private
practice, at least in North America, is very high:
with 1/3 gone by third year and of the remaining
associates, 44% plan to leave by fifth year.1

Given this reality does it not make more sense to
actually accelerate training and development for
those who remain with the firm past fifth year?

Think about the contribution to the firm of each
of these individuals who makes partner, over a
thirty-year career as a partner. You do the math
for your firm but if the average partner in your
firm generates $1Million per year for thirty years
that’s $30Million. If senior training and
development in such areas as “managing
transaction teams”, “mentoring”, “business
development”, “managing client teams” and
“leadership” could accelerate the growth of his
or her practice beyond that $1Million per year
does it not make sense to increase the training
and development investment as associates get
closer to partnership and beyond that threshold?

Firm leaders struggle with where to invest
resources. If you spend all your money training
juniors and neglect your senior associates and
junior partners, those young partners may never
achieve their potential. If you neglect your
juniors you may accelerate their departure
because they feel they aren’t getting adequate
training. Finally there are those partners who
want to strip-mine the firm every year and who
complain to firm leaders that money spent on
people who leave anyway is a waste of cash they
could otherwise be earning personally.

In the
final analysis, as one Director of Professional
Talent put it, it is “better to train them and have
them leave than not to train them and have them
stay”.

Investment in talent development is measurable
and can be measured for each year of call to the
bar that flows through your firm. Development and retention of talent impacts the
only two sustainable levers of profitability – both
of which are impacted by investments in
professional development:

Net Income Per Partner = Utilization x Rate x Margin x Leverage2

Mentoring Relationships

Relationships are a critical component in the
development of professionals. Good working
relationships create an environment where
feedback happens naturally. Feedback,
considered very important by 83% of associates
in our study, is most effective when it is ongoing
and informal. As one individual put it, “waiting
until my yearly review to criticize me for
something that happened six months ago is not
effective; it does not help me develop”.

The demographic groups in law firms today have
very differing views on relationships and
feedback. For Baby Boomers, feedback is a
means to an end, whereas those associates who
are in Generation X crave it.

Mentoring relationships that Baby Boomer
partners experienced was very different than the
relationships that are desired by both Generation
X and Y who are now their juniors. If indeed
44% of associates today are citing lack of
meaningful relationships as a primary reason for
leaving a firm, that number is likely to go up
unless partners develop the interpersonal skills
needed to nurture the next generations.

We asked associates to describe the relationship
with the partner(s) with whom they worked most
closely. While it is clear that the relationship is
complex, the relationships appear to be a mix of
mentor, work provider and boss.

Digging a little deeper, we asked partners how
they treated the associates they worked closely
with and asked associates how they felt they
were treated.

There are four areas of disconnect worthy of
mention. It is not the percentage of respondents
that is of particular concern but rather the gap
between how partners think they treat associates
and indeed how associates feel. While generally,
associates feel valued, indeed feel like they have
a future with the firm, others feel like employees
whose purpose is to produce and if they don’t
they are fungible. While partners indicate that
they treat some of the associates like future
partners, a significant number of the associates in
our survey are not getting that message. They
feel like employees rather than like talent.

Highly motivated associate lawyers, who stay
long enough, add to both the top and bottom line,
increase partner productivity and contribute
significantly to the building and retention of
client relationships. The select few who make
partner add to the financial stability of the firm
and its legacy. When high turnover rates occur
within associate ranks, marked decreases in
associate productivity become evident because
both departed associates and those currently with
the firm are distracted. Partner productivity
increases by default, profits remain flat - or
worse, go into decline. In all cases, the
recruiting costs negatively impact margin.

Conclusion

Developing professionals to their potential is
complex. The tension between some in the
partnership who view it as an investment while
others view it as an expenditure of resources.

High potential professionals (like high potential
athletes) will not likely reach their potential if
left on their own. Young talent needs an
integrated approach that includes:

meaningful relationships with partners and
senior associates (learn by observing),

A Winning Game Plan for Professional
Development

A common denominator for all generations of lawyers is the desire to win. In order to win, a team needs to work together and execute a game plan. Consider the outcome of the basketball team who does not practice together before the big game and whose players perform individually. This is a recipe for failure. Such is the case in law firms whose partnership does not contribute to ongoing professional development (PD) activities.

Whether it is mentoring, feedback or teaching, the consensus that partners and associates alike will benefit from learning and practicing together is the first step for effective PD. Functioning as a team is a difficult paradigm shift for many attorneys who, in many cases, practice as sole practitioners in a loosely structured organization called a “firm”. However, in the current landscape of legal practice; i.e. increasing firm size, time pressures and client demands, this change in mindset and approach is vital to ensure future success. “None of us is as smart as
all of us.” – Japanese proverb

Once the commitment to PD is made and rewards are in place, the next step is investing in professionals to drive the process. In other words, the team needs a coach who will coordinate and focus the team’s energy. Choose professionals who have knowledge of and experience in educational programming, who understand client service industries and have superior communication skills.

Once you’ve gathered the team and have chosen the leader, the last step is developing and executing the game plan. The PD professional should take the following
steps.

Interact with firm leadership in order to
understand the Firm’s business objectives.

Define the skill sets necessary to meet those
objectives.

Design and deliver learning experiences that
teach those skills using a combination of inhouse
talent and external providers. The
most effective professional development
activities engage all levels of legal talent
through frequent interactive experiences.

Obtain ongoing program evaluation to
maintain quality and communicate results to
law firm leaders.

Professional development activities shared by an
entire partnership and driven by PD
professionals is a winning game plan that
delivers success in client services.

Joyce Keen, Director of Professional
Development, Blank Rome LLP

After the JD: First Results of a National Study of Legal Careers, co-sponsored by NALP Foundation and the American Bar Association, Page 53 Turnover & Mobility